[1eyedjack]

I can't get excited about the comparison between the snapshots in terms of aesthetics. They appear pretty neutral to me as a preference. Certainly the different background colour of the empty tables is sufficient to completely override any clutter effect of the "Sit!" narrative.

For me the one point in this area of significant difference, which the snapshot cannot show, is that the windows client would instantly auto-refresh as the seating changes, where with the web client it only refreshes on user prompting or after a significant constant delay. Leaving aside the reason for this as being obvious, it remains inescapable that the discrepancy will generate a preference for one over the other, although perhaps not universal.

The disadvantage of the web version is that at any given instant the snapshot may be out of date and the seat on which you click to sit may no longer be available.

The disadvantage of the download version is that the constantly changing seats meant that the rows would move about at random so that it was quite difficult to select a chosen seat if you spent a second's thought on it. That could have been overcome by ensuring that tables remained in a stationary position where possible, but that is all in the past now.

Both disadvantages are/were pretty irritating for me.

[1eyedjack]

While on the subject, another irritation for me is the way that the tables are displayed on the mobile version. Both the Windows and Flash version have in common the display of tables in a linear row, while the mobile version displays them in a square formation, and in so doing reduces the amount of information that can be displayed all at once on a mobile display. This seems a curious decision given that the greatest resource pressure in mobile devices is screen real estate.

[RichMor]

barmar, on 2017-February-21, 11:04, said:

Here's what I see:



The text in the web version is bigger and less dense.

barmar,

Thanks for the reply and the screen prints.

Couple of things;
the color contrast in the web version (looks like 'cyan' and some kind of grey) is less distinct than the Win version,
the 'Sit' text is why ?
I don't understand the numbers, should I care ?

This is not big stuff but it affects me after 30 minutes plus using the web version.

Meanwhile:
how about a 'service fee' for those who want to keep the Windows version ? I realize there is a cost to BBO for maintaining the Windows interface. I am willing to pay a reasonable price for this.

Closing:
BBO is a great service. As Joe Walsh said 'I can't complain but some times I still do'

Rich Morrison

[1eyedjack]

RichMor, on 2017-February-21, 14:01, said:

As Joe Walsh said 'I can't complain ...'

As did my North Korean pen-pal when I asked him if he enjoyed living there.

[barmar]

RichMor, on 2017-February-21, 14:01, said:

I don't understand the numbers, should I care ?

If you're looking for a table to kibitz, tables with lots of other kibitzers are often a good place to go.

[kenberg]

I am trying to get with the new age and use the net version. But it is resisting.

When I type into chat, there is a maybe ten second delay before it appears. By then I have often retyped, thinking I did not have the cursor set right. Then maybe I send a repeated message. Or I start erasing and create a mess. Or whatever.

Do I need to reset something on my computer?

Or maybe I am logging in wrongly. I google bbo and I see
http://www.bridgebas...ient/client.php
https://www.bridgebase.com/
http://www.bridgebase.com/online/

Does it matter with which I start the login?

Computer systems often make reasonably normal people start to doubt their sanity.

[diana_eva]

kenberg, on 2017-February-24, 13:40, said:

I am trying to get with the new age and use the net version. But it is resisting.

When I type into chat, there is a maybe ten second delay before it appears. By then I have often retyped, thinking I did not have the cursor set right. Then maybe I send a repeated message. Or I start erasing and create a mess. Or whatever.

Do I need to reset something on my computer?

Or maybe I am logging in wrongly. I google bbo and I see
http://www.bridgebas...ient/client.php
https://www.bridgebase.com/
http://www.bridgebase.com/online/

Does it matter with which I start the login?

Computer systems often make reasonably normal people start to doubt their sanity.

Are you using Firefox? Try Chrome if you have it, we had some reports from players that Firefox does weird stuff recently.

[barmar]

Don't use this: http://www.bridgebase.com/online/ I don't know where you got that from.

It's apparently a copy of our old home page. But the link to play or watch bridge goes to the same web client as the real home page.

[kenberg]

barmar, on 2017-February-24, 16:06, said:

Don't use this: http://www.bridgebase.com/online/ I don't know where you got that from.

It's apparently a copy of our old home page. But the link to play or watch bridge goes to the same web client as the real home page.

I will explain what I do. Casual conversation suggests that I am not the only one having problems, so I will give details.

I bring up Firefox. This allows me to use google
I type bbo in the google search bar.
The three links I kist above come up from the google search. In greater detail they are:


Login / Register - Bridge Base Online
www.bridgebase.com/client/client.phpPlay Bridge on Bridge Base Online.



Bridge Base Online - BBO
www.bridgebase.com/online/Free online bridge. Largest bridge site in the world. Duplicate, tournaments, money games, vugraph,
Bridge Base Online
https://www.bridgebase.com/Free service offers play and practice areas. Presentation of live Vugraph with commentary. ACBL sanctioned tournaments.‎BridgeBase Online (BBO) · ‎Play or Watch Bridge · ‎Just Play Bridge · ‎4 hands



Ok, I used the first
www.bridgebase.com/client/client.php

I log in and I am in.

I go down to the chat bar, lect click so the cursor shows, I type
v
Nothing shows.
I left click,
The v shows up
I type w
Nothing shows up.
I left click
the w shows up
I type Hello world
Hello w shows up
I left click
then I get the orld added on.

One mre try. I type goodbye. Nothing. So I left click. I get goodbye.

I don't get it.

[barmar]

Unfortunately, Google has a bad habit of bringing up old links like that.

They used to have a page that website administrators could use to block certain links, and we used it to filter out the ones we knew about. But they got rid of it a few months ago, and now these things come back. I'll try to get those pages updated.

[barmar]

I just tried BBO in the latest version of Firefox, I didn't have any trouble with the chat line.

But as Diana said, if Firefox doesn't work for you, try Chrome. We don't know why different users have problems with particular browsers, but the only solution we can suggest is to switch browsers.

[kenberg]

barmar, on 2017-February-25, 16:29, said:

I just tried BBO in the latest version of Firefox, I didn't have any trouble with the chat line.

But as Diana said, if Firefox doesn't work for you, try Chrome. We don't know why different users have problems with particular browsers, but the only solution we can suggest is to switch browsers.

Right.
I am thinking it could be one of those things where some protection program is interfering. Every once n a while something just goes nuts. Usually I play around until I find some button to push that fixes it.
Thanks.

I have been thinking of switching over to chrome anyway. Just for a change. Try this, try that.

[ArcLight]

I have avoided using the new software because I didn't like it but now that I am forced to use it I have a few suggestions.


1 - When I am Dummy I want to look at the opponents hands and see how they card. Do they make Ace underleads? Do they make questionable bids? Do they card in weird ways?
The new software doesn't allow me to see the opponents hands, so it's far less interesting to me to watch. I end up web surfing instead.

Easy fix - allow an option when setting up the table to keep opponents hands visible to dummy


2 - I don't like the new sounds. On numerous occasions I didn't realize it was my turn to bid. The old software had a distinctive sound and it was obvious when I had to bid even if I was web surfing.

Suggestion - change the sounds and make the "Your Turn To Bid" sound much louder and distinct.


3 - With the old software it was easy to see who was kibitzing, and what player profiles are. Now to see kibs I have to go to the side then click on some tabs. Even then the list doesn't refresh. It would be nice if there was a place on the main screen that if you moved your cursor there would show kibitzers, updated every 5 seconds.
But more importantly its annoying that profiles stay up for 6 seconds after I move the mouse off the player. If 3 people want to sit at the table, its annoying to have to manually close each box.

Suggestion - when you mouse off the player - the screen should close immediately.



I'm sorry to say but I much preferred the old software. BBO had good reasons for retiring it and moving to this format, I'm not knocking them for that. But I really dislike this current version.

[scarletv]

ArcLight, on 2017-March-05, 08:32, said:

1 - When I am Dummy I want to look at the opponents hands and see how they card. Do they make Ace underleads? Do they make questionable bids? Do they card in weird ways?
The new software doesn't allow me to see the opponents hands, so it's far less interesting to me to watch. I end up web surfing instead.

Easy fix - allow an option when setting up the table to keep opponents hands visible to dummy

A nice feature when kibbing is allowed. I would recommend not to allow it when kibbing is forbidden.

[Ovis]

I can only underline the critics of web version comparing to win version. It forces you to open security holes because of Flash plug in and it lacks features of the older one. Besides it is slow, clumsy and unstable as you get expelled more often by the server.

Sad that administrators are stubbornly denying evidence.

[barmar]

Ovis, on 2017-March-05, 10:47, said:

I can only underline the critics of web version comparing to win version. It forces you to open security holes because of Flash plug in and it lacks features of the older one. Besides it is slow, clumsy and unstable as you get expelled more often by the server.

Sad that administrators are stubbornly denying evidence.

AFAIK, there are no known Flash security holes. Can you please cite the ones you're referring to? Adobe posts frequent Flash updates, pretty much exclusively to fix holes as soon as they're discovered (since there's no active development of Flash).

Anyway, we're working on a new web version that will not use Flash.

[kenberg]

Fwiw:

Above I noted a problem I was having with the new version. I am happy to say that barmar's suggestion worked. For anyone else with this problem, I summarize what I did.

Issue: I was using Firefox on Windows 10. If it's relevant, I have McAfee installed as well. I was finding problems using chat, and problems using the hand editor when I wanted to create hands. It is not specifically my computer. My wife's computer is also Windows 10 and I had the same problems if I opened BBO from Firefox on hers.

barmar's suggestion: Try Chrome instead of Firefox.

I did that. Chrome said I had to update Flash so I did. After that, all is well.

Note: I tried using Firefox after the Flash update to see if that would now work. Nope. However I did not try also updating Flash again, while having Firefox up, so maybe that would work. But I simply use Chrome now to open BBO.

As to security holes, it was from BBO that I first heard of it, but it was, I think, at least a couple of years back. I don't remember the details but a BBO message (from BBO, mayb FG himself, not a comment from some user) warned of an issue. My knowledge of such things is minimal, so I decided to err on the side of caution and I stayed away from the web version of BBO and, more generally, I stayed away from Flash for a bit. But of course I figured that whatever the issue was it would be fixed after a bit so I did not stay away permanently.

The above covers the specifics of my problem and its solution, offered in case others are having similar issues, but I will take this opportunity to make a general comment.

I have come to really value simplicity. And stability. I have a smart phone that does many things that I have never learned how to do. I don't see any need to do them. Making a phone call is now harder. Easiest is with my landline, which I still have. The simple cell I used to have was ok. But there are times that I feel I am just too dumb to master my **** smartphone.
This applies to many things in the ever more technological world. I sometimes go to Starbucks and read. I sometimes go to Starbucks and chat with people, although much less often now that everyone is wired up. I have no interest in going to Starbucks and playing bridge on my smartphone. I realize Apps have all sorts of pluses, but so does the simple life.
Of course the programmers believe that their apps are simple to use. And for their fellow programmers this might be true. For the rest of us, not so much. Ok, I am 78. But there are a lot of us.

Anyway, switching from Firefox to Chrome, and updating Flash, solved the problem for me. Thanks. But perhaps the Firefox people are not happy with this solution?

[Ovis]

barmar, on 2017-March-05, 11:31, said:

AFAIK, there are no known Flash security holes. Can you please cite the ones you're referring to? Adobe posts frequent Flash updates, pretty much exclusively to fix holes as soon as they're discovered (since there's no active development of Flash).

Anyway, we're working on a new web version that will not use Flash.

? C'mon, what's your planet? :-) Sorry to express it that way...

Why do you think Adobe is constantly updating Flash and forced to do so? The warnings against that platform are weekly records on level nerds do newbies on the web! That's why Firefox does not support it anymore in the recent versions. That is my preferred browser as it should be for everybody. All others have (when unpaid) either spy shamelessly on your privacy or are much more often in constant ennemy fire from hackers.

Nice that you reckon Flash is not so trustworthy after all and are preparing to swith to HTML5. I look forward to that and keep my reservations on the quality of the now obligatory version.

[1eyedjack]

Ovis, on 2017-March-06, 07:40, said:

Why do you think Adobe is constantly updating Flash and forced to do so?

I don't think that it does so any more frequently than does Windows

[barmar]

Ovis, on 2017-March-06, 07:40, said:

Nice that you reckon Flash is not so trustworthy after all and are preparing to swith to HTML5. I look forward to that and keep my reservations on the quality of the now obligatory version.

The main reason we're going to HTML5 is because browser's are planning to phase out Flash support.

Of course, the two are not unrelated, security issues are one of the reasons why they're getting rid of Flash. But others are because it's a performance hog, and HTML5/JS now can do just about everything Flash can do, so it's not needed.

But at the time we implemented the new version, the only real choices were between Flash and Java -- Javascript simply didn't have enough functionality a decade ago. In retrospect, we chose the right one, as Java has a much more notorious history of security problems than Flash.